From owner-freebsd-arm@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 25 22:16:38 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: arm@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C3D6106564A; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 22:16:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from raj@semihalf.com) Received: from semihalf.com (semihalf.com [206.130.101.55]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16D728FC0A; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 22:16:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from raj@semihalf.com) Received: from mail.semihalf.com (mail.semihalf.com [83.15.139.206]) by semihalf.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id mAPMGZ8O029755; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 15:16:36 -0700 Received: from apn-77-112-253-159.gprs.plus.pl (apn-77-112-253-159.gprs.plus.pl [77.112.253.159]) by mail.semihalf.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10DD71435F; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 23:32:21 +0100 (CET) Message-Id: <20EB52EA-EA95-42A4-9319-7838F0128447@semihalf.com> From: =?ISO-8859-2?Q?Rafa=B3_Jaworowski?= To: Nathan Whitehorn In-Reply-To: <492C74CE.4090808@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v929.2) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 23:16:07 +0100 References: <20081125.104452.535842403.imp@bsdimp.com> <04BDAB4F-CF02-4CE6-90D8-E03EDC1CC8CC@semihalf.com> <492C74CE.4090808@freebsd.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.929.2) Cc: arm@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Code review request: boards on AT91 X-BeenThere: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the StrongARM Processor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 22:16:38 -0000 On 2008-11-25, at 22:57, Nathan Whitehorn wrote: > Rafa=B3 Jaworowski wrote: >> On 2008-11-25, at 18:44, M. Warner Losh wrote: >> >> >>> If anybody wants me to write up where I'm going with this, or answer >>> any question, please feel free to ask. Also, comments would be =20 >>> nice. >> >> I was dreaming once about all-generic initarm() that would have =20 >> KOBJ-based dispatcher, but am not sure this wouldn't cause some =20 >> chicken-and-egg issues as some parts of the infrastructure might =20 >> not be available at such early stages, but didn't investigate this =20= >> too close, any thoughts? But anyways, even a simple scheme with =20 >> common logic and function ptrs, which each platform variation would =20= >> implement their own routines (or use generic), would improve the =20 >> ARM init code significantly. > I am about to commit a patch in order to provide Open Firmware =20 > modularization using KOBJ (coincidentally, this should make =20 > supporting FDTs much easier). In order to this, I had to make KOBJ =20 > behave itself when invoked almost at the very beginning of the boot =20= > process on both PowerPC and SPARC, so you shouldn't have any trouble =20= > putting this in very early boot on ARM either once this hits the tree. Oh, very interesting news, thanks a lot -- I'll definitely look at =20 your code. Rafal=